Introduction

There are two works on Indian philosophy which are known under
the name Paramārthasāra. The earlier one among them is an
ancient work by Ādiśeṣa. Patañjali is generally known by such
name because it is believed that he was an incarnation of Śeṣanāga,
the famous thousand headed serpent god. Such belief can have
risen out of the fact of his having been the master writer who did
multifarious and extensive academic work as if he had one
thousand heads to think and mouths to speak; or it is just possible
that he may have originally belonged to some Nāga-worshippers’
sect and may have consequently been called a Nāga.
Yogarāja the commentator of the later Paramārthasāra of Abhi-
navagupta committed a mistake in taking the Paramārthasāra of
Śeṣa as a work belonging to Sāṁkhya system. Writers have since
then been following that view and not even any research scholars
of the present age have bothered to correct the mistake. There is
no doubt in the fact that some elements of Sāṁkhya philosophy
are present in the work of Śeṣa, but the elements of Vaiṣṇavite
theism shine more brilliantly in it. Besides, some elements of
Sāṁkhya principles can be found in many other schools of Indian
philosophy which are definitely different from the Sāṁkhya school.
In fact the Paramārthasāra of Śeṣa is a work of that ancient age
in which the ancient theistic Sāṁkhya of sage Kapila, the ancient
Vaiṣṇavism of Mahābhārata and the theistic Vedānta philosophy
of Upaniṣads were studied as one and single integrated school of
thought with all such elements supporting one another. Such
elements of philosophy had yet to bifurcate and to evolve as some
distinctly separate schools of thought. But, in spite of their such
integration, the Vaiṣṇavite character of the work is distinctly
predominant. The Vaiṣṇavism of Patañjali, unlike the philosophy
of later Vaiṣṇavas, is of monistic view and has absolutism as its
metaphysical and ontological character. The later Vaiṣṇavism
leans towards Vaiṣṇavite mythology but the Vaiṣṇavism of Patañ-
jali maintains its philosophic character. Vallabha advocates a